One in every eleven persons born in Mexico has gone to the U.S. The National Review reported that in 2014 $1.87 billion was spent on incarcerating illegal immigrant criminals….Now add hundreds of billions for welfare and remittances! MICHAEL BARGO, Jr…… for the AMERICAN THINKER.COM

Saturday, October 29, 2016

"Republicans should call for lower immigration to stop the Democrat voter recruitment. But more importantly, all Americans should call for lower immigration in order to offer a better opportunity of finding jobs for those millions of their fellow Americans of all political persuasions who would like to work."

granted work
permits through President Barack Obama’s 2012 executive amnesty

program, according
to the Migration Policy Institute."

The ‘Untold Threat’ Responsible for 40% of Illegal Immigrants

U.S. airports like this one were not set up to capture biometric data such as fingerprints from outbound international travelers, making it harder to know who overstays their visas. (Photo: Bob Riha JR/Reuters/Newscom)

Debate over illegal immigration tends to focus on how to control and treat those who make it across our nation’s borders, a more enduring challenge for the U.S. government has been what to do to stop legal entrants from overstaying their allotted time here.

The problem of so-called visa “overstays”—which make up about 40 percent of the 11 million people living illegally in the U.S.—will continue on past the Obama administration and follow the next president.

That’s partially because the government has not yet delivered on its long-promised—and congressionally mandated—plan to create a better checkout system to track who has left the country on time, and who hasn’t.

“It [visa overstays] is the most overlooked issue when it comes to immigration,” Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, who chairs the House Homeland Security Committee, said in an interview with The Daily Signal.

The Daily Signal is the multimedia news organization of The Heritage Foundation. We’ll respect your inbox and keep you informed.

“It’s an untold threat,” McCaul added. “We are allowing millions of people to overstay visas and remain in this country who could potentially pose a threat to homeland security.”

The uncertainty around the scope of the problem comes at a time when a growing percentage of the illegal immigrant population is made up of visa overstays as opposed to people being apprehended at the border.

For more than 20 years, the U.S. government had struggled to quantify just how many people entered the country legally with a visa and stayed too long, making it impossible to prescribe policy fixes.

That finally changed in January, when the Department of Homeland Security released a first-of-its-kind study reporting that 527,127 people who traveled legally to the U.S. for business or leisure and were supposed to leave the country in fiscal year 2015 in fact overstayed their visas.

This figure is larger than the 337,117 people caught crossing the border illegally last year.

The long-awaited data from 2015 was not all-encompassing. It counted only visa holders who entered the U.S. by air and sea, not by land, and it did not include those who came as students or temporary workers.

Still, immigration and security experts as well as policymakers welcomed the new information because they thought it would force the government to move faster on methods to improve, most importantly in trying to assemble a system to obtain biometric data—such as fingerprints, facial recognition images, and eye scans—on those leaving the country.

‘A Top Issue’

The 9/11 Commission recommended the Department of Homeland Security complete an entry and exit system “as soon as possible,” viewing it as an important national security tool because two of the hijackers on Sept. 11, 2001, had overstayed their visas.

Plagued by financial and logistical challenges, the government has introduced various pilot projects at some airports and land borders, but is still a few years off from implementing a biometric exit system on a large scale.

Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson has pledged to have biometric checks at major airports in 2018, and Congress in last year’s omnibus spending bill authorized $1 billion in visa fee increases over 10 years to pay for an exit system.

The struggle to install a biometric exit tracking system is well known.

Foreigners who apply to enter the U.S. on a visa are interviewed and photographed and have their fingerprints taken at a consulate overseas before arriving here. But collecting biometric data on those exiting the country is not as easy.

That’s because U.S. airports do not have exclusive terminals for domestic and international flights, which makes it hard for officers from Homeland Security’s Customs and Border Patrol to screen overseas travelers and get their information.

“Most countries have a designated checkout system built in airports,” Stewart Verdery, a senior Homeland Security official during George W. Bush’s administration, said in an interview with The Daily Signal. Verdery added:

We just didn’t build our airports this way. So the question is where do you collect the information in a way that doesn’t inconvenience travelers and is actually effective in making sure someone has left? None of the options are particularly great. And though the biometric equipment is very mature, there is also a manpower issue over who maintains the machines.

To satisfy these limitations, Verdery expects the government to pursue a facial recognition exit system that automatically would snap a traveler’s photograph—likely at the gate.

‘It Doesn’t Matter’

Even if the U.S. were to settle on a workable exit tracking method, some national security experts doubt that such a system would be an effective counterterrorism tool, especially when considering its cost.

David Inserra, a homeland security expert at The Heritage Foundation, says the government could just as well use already collected biographical information, such as a traveler’s name and date of birth, to track exits and collect overstay data. But other experts say bad actors could use fake passports and aliases to bypass a system that did not require biometrics such as fingerprints and facial recognition.

No matter the method used, Inserra and other experts note that an exit system simply reveals who has departed—and remained—in the country. It would not help discover where those that stayed are living, and whether they present a security risk.

“Even if you have the greatest biometric exit system, if someone doesn’t leave, it doesn’t matter,” Inserra said, adding:

You are now left with the problem of every other police officer looking for someone. They are a missing person who doesn’t want to be found. If you want to stop visa overstays, the solution isn’t to spend money on an exit system.

Inserra argues that policymakers instead should give more money to intelligence agencies such as Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement so they can go into communities and try to locate—and deport—people who overstayed their visas.

Yet other experts are doubtful that would happen. They say the government does not prioritize enforcing immigration law against those who’ve stayed past their visa expiration date because those travelers were screened before coming here.

“In terms of removing a garden variety illegal migrant, you aren’t going to search for somebody on that basis,” Edward Alden, an immigration and visa policy expert at the Council on Foreign Relations, said in an interview with The Daily Signal. “The notion we will have some special dedicated effort to go find overstays I find completely implausible.”

Alden says the government can take simpler steps to deter visa overstays, by emailing reminders to foreigners of their expected departure date, specifying the consequences of not leaving on time.

Many who overstay their visas don’t intend to settle in America, Alden contends.

The Homeland Security report from earlier this year found that as of Jan. 4, a total of 416,500 of the 527,127 overstays in 2015 remained in the U.S. More have left the country since then, the government says.

The government also has taken diplomatic steps to better track foreign visitors, especially by improving information sharing with Canada, the country that had the most overstays in the U.S.

The U.S. and Canada exchange names and biographical information of those from third countries who enter on their shared border. Mexico, the second-largest source of visa overstays in the U.S., generally does not yet have the capacity to exchange information like that, Alden says.

‘Serious About Enforcement’

Despite these improvements, Congress is not backing off its demand for a biometric exit system.

McCaul, the chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, says he hopes for a vote next year on a broad border security bill he sponsored last year. It includes a provision requiring the government to establish an exit system at the 15 largest airports, seaports, and land ports within two years.

The legislation, which President Barack Obama promised to veto, would impose financial and other penalties on Department of Homeland Security political appointees if the government fails to meet the timeline.

Having the best data possible, supporters of the exit system say, will give the government incentive to more aggressively enforce the law against those who’ve overstayed visas.

“I think once the government gets an exit system up and running, they’ll be serious about enforcement,” Verdery said, adding:

We will never have a system where we will go out and find someone who overstays and just wants to do nothing on their buddy’s couch. But we will go out and find them when they try to get a job, draw the attention of law enforcement, or illegally try to claim benefits.

The Daily Signal depends on the support of readers like you. Donate now

By Genevieve Leigh
29 October 2016

Up to 162 million individuals in the United States and the
European Union, or 20 to 30 percent of the working-age population, engage in
“independent work,” a phenomenon that makes up what is being called the “gig
economy,” according to a McKinsey Global Institute report released this month.

The report defines this independent work as a position that meets
three basic criteria: a high degree of autonomy; payment by task, assignment,
or sales; and a short-term relationship between the worker and the customer.
These jobs include things like freelance work, driving for Uber, sales on Etsy,
renting out rooms on Airbnb, and various temp jobs.

The report divides those who take part in independent work into
four categories under the headings: “free agents,” those who both actively
choose independent work and collect their primary income from it; “casual
earners,” defined as workers who supplement their main income with independent
work and do so by choice; “reluctants,” who make their primary income from this
work but would prefer traditional jobs: and “financially strapped,” workers who
do independent work out of necessity.

The group referred to as the “reluctants” make up 14 percent of
independent workers, which equates to 23 million people. The “financially
strapped” comes in slightly ahead, at 16 percent, or 26 million people. This
adds up to almost 50 million people who take second or third jobs in the
independent sphere out of necessity.

The report does not include what are becoming known as “fissured
workers,” those whose jobs are considered non-core functions such as technical
support, janitorial services and security, and are therefore being turned over
to vendors and subcontractors, often resulting in another form of casualized
labor.

The report explains that independent work provides many “macro
benefits” to the economy by increasing labor force participation and the number
of hours worked in the economy. Also among the beneficiaries of this layer of
workers are the owners of startups, who rely on such cheap labor to avoid the
“burden” of full-time employees. In other words, those on the receiving end of
the “benefits” of the casualization of the labor force are not the workers, but
the capitalist class, the petty-bourgeois, and aspiring petty-bourgeois layers
who are no longer forced to supply long-term fixed jobs to their employees.

As the study notes, independent workers have limited access to
income security protections, such as unemployment insurance, workers’
compensation, and disability insurance. Since pay is often awarded as a lump
sum according to the type of project, rather than by hours worked, minimum wage
laws may not apply and retirement security is virtually nonexistent. Most
casualized laborers are not provided health insurance, forcing them to turn to
the overpriced Obamacare exchanges, or individual insurance market, or pay tax
penalties for not being insured.

In addition, workers are considered to be “independent
contractors” by the IRS, which requires paying self-employment tax in addition
to income tax. This type of work creates other obstacles as well, such as
reduced access to credit, the risk of not being paid for work that is already
performed, and complex tax filing, licensing and regulatory compliance
requirements.

However, many of the obstacles cited above have come to apply not
only to part-time work, but to full-time jobs as well. With workers’ pensions
being liquidated in many major US cities going through economic crises,
Obamacare health care plans on track to increase by 25 percent in 2017, and
wages remaining stagnant across the board, the “benefits” of full-time
employment are becoming more and more a thing of the past.

The reality of the situation is that casualizing the workforce
means only that the working class may now “choose” how they wish to be
exploited, be it a “traditional” 9 to 5 job, or under the more novel guise of
“independent” work.

Often packaged as creating “options” for workers, as this study
suggests, the reality is that these new forms of employment provide options and
increased profits for the ruling class. The push for more part-time and
independent work is an attempt to curb the declining rate of profit, inherent
in the capitalist system, by finding new ways to squeeze labor at a lower cost.
It stokes competition between workers who are now forced to enter a race to the
bottom within the independent sphere, as well as between those in the
independent sphere and in full-time employment.

Possibly most affected by this shift in the

economy is the
Millennial generation, those

aged 18-30. The report notes that more than

half
of those under age 25 participate in

independent work, not just in the United

States but throughout the European Union as

well.

WHY OBAMA’S CRONY BANKSTERS WANT MORE OBAMA-CLINTONOMICS

“Clinton has also stepped up her efforts to woo billionaires who
have traditionally supported Republican campaigns on the grounds that she will
be a more effective “commander in chief” and defender of the interests of Wall
Street.”

“Our entire crony capitalist
system, Democrat and Republican alike, has become a kleptocracy approaching par
with third-world hell-holes. This is the way a great country is raided by
its elite.” ---- Karen McQuillanTHE AMERICAN THINKER.com

FOLLOWING THE CRIMES OF BILL AND HILLARY CLINTON BECOMES AMERICA’S ROAD
TO REVOLUTION

The new reports show that in addition to “traditional” coping strategies
of skipping meals and eating cheap food, these teens and pre-teens are
increasingly forced into shoplifting, stealing, selling drugs, joining a gang,
or selling their bodies for money in a struggle to eat properly.

THE CLINTON “JOBS” PLAN ENDORSED BY NARCOMEX – IT’S CALLED
AMNESTY!

Clinton, in the guise of a “jobs” and “infrastructure” program,
promoted yet another scheme to hand out tax cuts and other incentives for
companies to hire workers at poverty-level wages, with the trade unions brought
in to keep the workers in line in return for a cut in the spoils.

"Republicans should call for lower
immigration to stop the Democrat voter recruitment. But more importantly,
all Americans should call for lower immigration in order to offer a better
opportunity of finding jobs for those millions of their fellow Americans of all
political persuasions who would like to work."

WASHINGTON, DC (November 2, 2016) — The Center for Immigration Studies has produced two maps displaying those employers defined as dependent on H-1B foreign workers and those classified by the Department of Labor (DOL) as abusing the program.

Well over 2,000 employers have such a high percentage of H-1B workers that they are identified as "H-1B dependent" under the Immigration and Nationality Act sec. 212(n)(3). These employers actively prefer alien workers, whom they bring into the U.S. under the H-1B program on employer-sponsored nonimmigrant visas. These are skilled workers, usually with college degrees, who receive three-year visas which can be, under some circumstances, renewed virtually forever.

Center Fellow David North, who oversaw preparation of the maps, said, "One great concern with the H-1B program is the prevalent discrimination. Under H-1B, an employer can prefer foreigners over Americans, Indians over Germans, and young workers over old. Of course, the biggest lure of the program is that they can be paid at below-market wages."

The second map shows the 45 H-1B employers who are classed as willful violators of the program or are debarred from using it. At some point in the past, these employers violated the H-1B rules, typically being abusive to workers, and have been denied the use of H-1B workers for a period of time. The DOL rarely punishes erring H-1B employers, so this number barely scratches the surface.